Big Government proponents justify government growth under the auspices of helping "the little guy". But the results of Big Government tell a different story. Especially in the business world, rather than being an objective referee, Big Government colludes with Big Business and drives out small business through burdensome and costly regulation, complex and unequal taxation, and corruption masquerading as corporate welfare.

A report from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University is more proof of this phenomenon. Dodd-Frank was a government takeover of the financial sector disguised as reform. The chart below taken from the report shows Dodd-Frank is accomplishing its ultimate goal--the takeover of small banks by big banks.

The outrage over the IRS targeting conservative groups is warranted, but the shock is not. The tax code for decades has been used as a manipulative tool of social planners.

Disregarding the rule of law, lawmakers have used the tax code to encourage “good” and punish “bad” behavior that otherwise cannot be mandated. For years, whole classes of people have been disadvantaged because tax laws are neither made nor implemented equally.

So-called “sin taxes” are the best example. Sin taxes are popular because they target minorities participating in activities the majority considers undesirable. It may not be illegal to smoke, buy a yacht, rent, stay single, or drink soda, but government still can punish those who do—simply because the majority disapproves.

Leftism has always been a religion. Fixed on perfecting the world, leftists are used to commissioning the tax code in their crusade. As such, one can almost forgive Lois Lerner for believing she “did nothing wrong” in allegedly targeting conservative groups. In her world it is okay to target sinners, and there is no greater sinner than a Conservative.

As the WSJ's James Taranto is fond of pointing out, sometimes Life Imitates the Onion. Today's Politico has a piece on a boy made famous after a speech he gave at a CPAC convention at 13 years old. Jonathan Krohn, according to Politico, was supposed to be a boy wonder and political superstar of the right; that is, until he changed his mind and moved left. Here is Krohn explaning his conversion:

“I think it was naive,” Krohn now says of the speech. “It’s a 13-year-old kid saying stuff that he had heard for a long time...The speech was something that a 13-year-old does. You haven’t formed all your opinions. You’re really defeating yourself if you think you have all of your ideas in your head when you were 12 or 13. It’s impossible. You haven’t done enough.”

So now at 17 Mr. Krohn has done enough to have mature, fully formed opinions. Hilarious.

According to Politico, this story puts aside the notion that as one grows older one becomes more conservative. Four years have passed, and that is not true for Jonathan. He's a grown man now and his opinions have matured--to the left. It wasn't that Krohn changed his opinions because he got a real job or otherwise took on some real responsibilty. No, Krohn's transformation was more theoretical. The article explains Krohn evolved from reading Bill Bennett and listening to talk radio to studying German philosophy (always a good idea) and watching The Daily Show.

Now Krohn is ready to grow even more and journey further into the real world. After graduation, he plans to enroll in New York University to study film and philosphy. Oh, the perspective he will have after four more years!

Over at Salon.com there is an (unintentionally) hilarious interview of Emily Mortimer from the cast of HBO’s new series, The Newsroom. In the interview Mortimer ridicules the Tea Party, George W. Bush, and the “dangerously uninformed” American public. A few excerpts:

Question: Were the politics of the show appealing to you as well?

…There was a time when…I got all into the idea of politics and anarchists and Kropotkin, this Russian guy who founded the anarchist party. I got completely besotted by the idea of anarchy as the way that we should all live our lives and I was ready to kind of go fight for my belief, but then I got to university and did lots of plays and kind of forgot about that.

It is a common story: Up and coming anarchist with a dream to fight for mayhem and chaos, but, alas, she forgets her love affair with political dysfunction because she did lots of plays and stuff.

Question: Are you as troubled by America’s news culture as Sorkin seems to be?

I can remember when Bush got in for the second time, just feeling like so much of the problem about the way that politics go here is that people are improperly informed. That they didn’t know that they had been lied to, or they didn’t understand exactly to what extent they had been, and they still thought that there were weapons of mass destruction. And that was just crazy to me that people could be so under-informed.

If there is one issue of which we are fully informed it is the no WMD in Iraq issue. To be under-informed on this issue one would have had to ignore every major news outlet, every late night talk show host, every screenwriter, every opinion columnist, every blogger, and every democrat for at least five years.

I bet more people in America know there were no WMD in Iraq than know telling a lie requires knowing beforehand what you say is untrue.

Question: You’ve lived in America for more than a decade, but you’re British. Have you always been engaged with American politics?

… The first 10 years of my being here there was a guy in charge (Bush) who was just so terrifying and it made me feel so unsettled the whole time that this guy was making those decisions. And it’s such a nice feeling having this guy (Obama) in charge now.

I’m glad Obama makes someone feel better. At least that is some recompense for the people still out of work and all of us concerned about government overreach and global instability.

And what was so terrifying about Bush exactly? He had many faults, but did he add five trillion to our debt in three years? Was he responsible for an impending Greek style meltdown? Did he turn Egypt over to the Muslim Brotherhood? Or turn his back on reformists in Iran? Did he encourage class envy? Turn the Justice Department over to ideologues? Ignore the mass execution of Syrians? Did Bush forswear the Constitution? Counteract the rule of law? Again, Bush made several mistakes while in office, but at least he was grounded in reality, he governed responsibly, and he operated in good faith with the American people.

I’m sure Mrs. Mortimer is a fine and charming lady. She is just guilty of what many liberals—especially those in Hollywood—are guilty of: she doesn’t know what she doesn’t know. For this reason Mrs. Mortimer can say such nonsense and feel smart doing so. It’s a good thing ignorance is bliss.

Lasting Liberty exists to bridge political philosophy with contemporary politics. Our content is designed to elevate political discourse in America and encourage the thoughtful citizen who seeks deeper political engagement.
Copyright & copy; 2009, LastingLiberty.com. All rights reserved.